In this phenomenological research study, I explored 21 parents’ perceptions about how the KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to better
engage parents in their children’s education and assist the school district in regaining and
sustaining its full accreditation. I collected data using in-depth, face-to-face
semistructured interviews with a snowball sample of 21 parents, seven from each school, who had children who attended either (a) one of two public elementary schools or (b) one public charter school in Kansas City, Missouri. This study was designed to answer one central research question about how the KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to better engage parents in their children’s education and assist the
school district in regaining and sustaining its full accreditation. Three subquestions were also considered, which were parents’ perceptions about how school leaders, teachers, and staff members engage parents in their children’s elementary schools; parents’ perceptions
about school leaders’, teachers’, and staff members’ connections to and understandings of their community; and parents’ perceptions about the best way they can make a difference in their children’s elementary schools.
Using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six phases of thematic analysis, five major themes and five minor themes were found. First, regarding the central research question about how the KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to better engage parents in their children’s education and assist the school district in regaining and
sustaining its full accreditation, two major themes were found. The first major theme for the central research question indicated that KCPS’ parent involvement policy and
practices can be improved to better engage parents in their children’s education if (a) schools were more welcoming to visiting parents, (b) afterhours activities were created for working parents, and (c) more points of contact between parents and school personnel were established. The second major theme for the central research question indicated that KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to assist the school
district in regaining and sustaining its full accreditation if teachers invested more time and effort in students and if school personnel made more efforts to keep parents informed.
Second, regarding the first subquestion about how school leaders, teachers, and staff members engage parents in their children’s elementary schools, one major theme
and two minor themes were found. The major theme for the first subquestion indicated that the district is currently implementing useful practices. The two minor themes for the first subquestion indicated that schools are not engaging parents and current practices are inadequate but improving. Third, regarding the second subquestion about school leaders’, teachers’, and staff members’ connections to and understandings of their community, one
major theme and two minor themes were found. The major theme for the second
subquestion indicated that school personnel have limited connection and understanding. The two minor themes for the second subquestion indicated that school personnel lack connection and understanding and school personnel have a solid connection and
understanding. Fourth, regarding the third subquestion about the best way they can make a difference in their children’s elementary schools, one major theme and one minor theme
and networking. In Chapter 5, I include the introduction, interpretation of findings, limitations of the study, recommendations, implications, and a conclusion.
Interpretation of Findings
To explore parents’ perceptions about how the KCPS’ parent involvement policy
and practices can be improved to better engage parents in their children’s education and assist the school district in regaining and sustaining its full accreditation, this
phenomenological research study was designed to answer one central research question and three subquestions. The findings for this study are interpreted in relation to Putnam’s (1993a, 2000) social capital theory and the literature review. This section is organized in the following subsections: central research question, Subquestion 1, Subquestion 2, and Subquestion 3.
Central Research Question
What are parents’ perceptions about how school leaders, teachers, and staff members engage parents in their children’s elementary schools? The findings for the
central research question may be attributed to Putnam’s (1993a, 2000) social capital theory and the literature review. The central research results indicated two major themes. The first major theme for the central research question indicated that KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to better engage parents in their children’s education if (a) schools were more welcoming to visiting parents, (b)
afterhours activities were created for working parents, and (c) more points of contact between parents and school personnel were established. These findings relate to
capital theory as parent involvement is important to the children’s academic success and the connections between people, larger groups, and organizations can be designed to support students’ overall development (Jeynes, 2012; Stevens & Patel, 2015).
Participants perceived a need for improvements in district policy, such as school personnel being more welcoming of parents into the school; inviting parents to the classrooms, cafeteria, and on school trips; creating and modifying afterhours school programs; and increased effort by teachers to reach out to parents by telephone, e- mailing, in-person meeting with parents that are separate from parent-teacher
conferences, group chat, weekly or monthly updates on students’ progress, and more interactions between parents, teachers, and students. The findings are consistent with the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) discussed cultivating partnership with parents who are described as help seekers and are more distant from their children’s schools by creating opportunities and policies that welcome parents into schools, such as reducing teachers’ perceptions of parental visitation as a threat or provide professional development that cultivates the teachers’ skills in conflict resolution and moderation.
In addition, participants reported that improvements in parental involvement needed to begin with parents, rather than with changes in district policy. This finding can be interpreted in the context of the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) found that although parents had a good understanding that local schools were not improving quickly, many parents were not ready to get more involved. Many parents viewed other issues and problems as more important to raising their children successfully and other changes such as getting more involved at home, as a more effective strategy. Although many parents
had concerns about the schools, most parents reported positive relationships with teachers and administrators at their children’s schools. However, Johnson et al. emphasized that this finding does not mean that parents do not care about school improvement or that they do not have important views and ideas that school leaders need to consider. Instead, Johnson et al. related that what this finding means is that even though many parents are not giving local schools very high marks, getting a substantial number of parents to become involved will not be easy. In addition, Johnson et al. discussed help seekers who posed a special challenge for school leaders because they felt more disillusioned with schools than the other groups of parents. Johnson et al. found that help seekers are present at their children’s schools and are looking for more support from teachers and
school leaders to assist them in helping their children succeed.
Furthermore, participants discussed the need for more stable leadership due to frequent changes in district leadership and inequitable treatment of schools. This finding is consistent with the literature as Finkel (2012) noted that KCPS has struggled with numerous leadership turnover with 27 short-term superintendents in the past 40 years. In addition, the author explained that KCPS has struggled with poor academic achievement and decreased enrollment and budget. Finkel reported that Superintendent Covington decreased the number of employees from 4,810 in 2008 through 2009 to 3,544 in 2010 through 2011, and decreased the number of schools from 60 in 2009 through 2010 to 29 in 2010 through 2011 (p. 29). Finkel noted that this decrease in employees and schools resulted in balanced budgets, but problems remained academically with test scores and graduation rates. Dent (2014) reported that in 2012, only 27% of Missouri students were
ready for college in all four subjects tested on the ACT college readiness assessment (p. 734).
The second major theme for the central research question indicated that KCPS’ parent involvement policy and practices can be improved to assist the school district in regaining and sustaining its full accreditation if teachers invested more time and effort in students and if school personnel made more efforts to keep parents informed. These findings may be attributed to Putnam’s (1993a, 2000) social capital theory. In relation to the finding that school personnel should make more effort to keep parents informed, Stevens and Patel (2015) noted that based on social capital theory, when the line of communication is used in a positive way, the relationship is strengthened, and trust is enhanced. Findings can also be interpreted in relation to the literature as the finding that teachers should invest more time and effort in students is in line with Johnson et al. (2013) reporting that parents who are help seekers do not believe that teachers and administrators are making genuine efforts to help their children succeed. Johnson et al. recommended that school leaders and staff members should make full effort to create relationships with the school community and build a greater understanding of the social, cultural, and environmental factors that affect students’ education.
Seven participants perceived a need for teachers to become more involved with students by implementing afternoon programs such as study hall and inviting parents to participate and get involved, rather than for a change to be made to the parent
involvement policy. This finding is in line with the literature as the NAFSCE (2015) reported that the NCLB Act has mandatory requirements for school districts and school
leaders to involve parents and families, similar in the ESSA, where similar mandatory requirements involve school districts offering programs and activities that include parents and family members, as well as meaningful consultations with parents. The NAFSCE related that programs and activities specifically include input from families, such as using parents’ input in creating a written parent and family engagement policy and assessing
family engagement policy and practices. In addition, the NAFSCE noted that other programs and activities includes family involvement in activities at Title I schools, putting aside at least 1% of grants to pay for parent and family involvement activities, having families take part in determining how to use these funds, and sending 90% of the funding directly to schools (para. 1).
For the second major theme, five parents reported that the parent involvement policy could help the district regain and retain its accreditation if it was changed and there was a requirement for school personnel to keep parents better informed through parent contracts that would inform parents about the requirements for their children’s grade, such as test scores; setting high school standards and enforcing them; helping parents feel connected and informed, which would improve engagement and student success; and e-mailing parents regarding students’ progress, which would improve their interactions with parents. In addition, in relation to the first major theme, five participants reported that they were not sufficiently familiar with the parent involvement policy to perceive opportunities for improvement; and six participants reported that they were not sufficiently aware of the parent involvement policy to perceive a need for improvements for the second major theme. These findings are in line with the literature, as Johnson et
al. (2013) reported that many parents lacked knowledge about important school issues. However, the findings also contradict the literature as KCMSD (2014) reporting of the KCPS parent involvement policy and practices are not consistent with these participants’
perceptions. KCMSD reported that each parent, student, staff member, or administrator signs the compact, which explains how parents, staff, and students will share
responsibility for students’ academic achievement; and how partnership is used to ensure
students achieve state’s high standards. Thus, the compact describes the responsibilities of parents, school staff, and students. In addition, KCMSD explained that parents are given timely notification on programs, pending conferences, workshops, and community forums to afford them opportunities for participation, which also contradicts the findings from these participants. Furthermore, KCMSD noted that school report cards are
provided to each parent at the end of the semester, which addresses parent participation, disaggregated achievement data with focus on the progress of the targeted population, attendance, school climate, and how the school’s Title 1 plan is progressing, which is also contradictory to the findings.
One participant noted that the district’s accreditation problems was due to a lack
of teacher involvement, rather than to insufficient parental engagement as teachers want a paycheck, are not at school to teach, are passing children when they are not ready, and should get more involved instead of always sending children to ISS. This finding relates to Putnam’s (1993a, 2000) social capital theory as Stevens and Patel (2015) discussed teachers blaming parents for students’ academic failure. Stevens and Patel suggested that
parents not having opportunities to be involved in the schools. Stevens and Patel argued that an examination of these factors help with understanding parents’ motivation to be involved in their children’s school. The researchers shared that motivation comes from
many sources, for example, parents investing themselves in a situation because they believe they can be successful in helping their children, it is a great use of their time and energy, or they may experience obstruction to being successfully involved.
Subquestion 1
What are parents’ perceptions about how school leaders, teachers, and staff members engage parents in their children’s elementary schools? The findings for
Subquestion 1 may be attributed to Putnam’s (1993a, 2000) social capital theory and the literature review. Subquestion 1 results indicated one major theme and two minor themes. The major theme for Subquestion 1 indicated that the district is currently implementing useful practices. In relation to the major theme that the district is currently implementing useful practices, 11 participants reported that the schools their children attended engaged in some practices that were genuinely helpful in increasing parental engagement, such as the PTA being an effective liaison by sending information to parents; the PTSO
encouraging parent engagement through fundraising; and school personnel engaging parents through team work, back-to-school events, parent-teacher conferences, Facebook page, concerts, e-mails, and telephone calls.
These findings may be attributed to Putnam’s social capital theory as Stevens and Patel (2015) explained that at the community level, school leaders and staff members create opportunities for parents to become involved. In addition, the findings are also
consistent with the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) recommended that effective strategies to build momentum for change and improvement in education must meet parents at their starting points and be designed for different types of parents, specifically, potential transformers, school helpers, and help seekers. Johnson et al. noted that another effective strategy is providing many and different opportunities for parents to engage. The researchers noted that the more diverse the opportunities to get involved, the greater the chance of attracting parents of different degrees of readiness, willingness, or ability. Johnson et al. emphasized that it is important to engage parents on problems such as school safety, but they should also be engaged on successes, such as the celebration of improvements in student achievement.
Findings for the major theme also indicated that participants perceived the
district’s parent involvement policy as adequate and that school personnel needed parents
to take some initiative. These findings are also in line with the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) reported that school helpers believe that they could do more, and they can be more engaged if they are asked in the correct way and provided with ways to get involved that respect their time and other commitments. Johnson et al. noted that cultivating
partnership with school helpers is to present options that provide a range of engagement levels and opportunities. The researchers noted that although school helpers believe that they could be doing more, they are already supporting their schools; thus, engagement in deeper ways to help improve school policies and practices or to create new community partnerships should not be presented as an all-consuming involvement. Hence, quick, high quality engagement, such as participating in a focus group or a well-designed
community forum may allow more parents to contribute. In addition, cultivating partnership with school helpers can include raising awareness of important education policy issues, demonstrating the power of parent engagement by making the connection between parent involvement and policy and practice changes, and communicating through trusted sources. Johnson et al. emphasized that school helpers have positive relationships with and trust in teachers and school principals, which presents an opportunity to use the strength of the relationship and communication to encourage parent involvement outside traditional in-school and at-home activities.
The two minor themes for the first subquestion indicated that schools are not engaging parents and current practices are inadequate but improving. In relation to the first minor theme that schools are not engaging parents, seven participants shared that school personnel were not trying to get parents engaged, such as assigning homework to the children, asking parents for their input, and considering the needs of parents. These findings can be interpreted in the context of the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) discussed the importance of communication, listening, and addressing key concerns. Johnson et al. explained that parents experience the KCPS education system differently; therefore, one communication strategy or focusing on only small subsets of issues may not work well for all parents. Johnson et al. recommended that change leaders should begin by listening as it is important to identify the main issues that parents are thinking about and to know how to think and talk about them. The researchers shared that parents will be most open to constructive involvement if they know their main concerns are understood and are being addressed. In addition, the NAFSCE (2015) discussed the
NCLB Act and ESSA mandatory requirements for school districts and school leaders to involve parents and families, such as using parents’ input in creating a written parent and
family engagement policy and assessing family engagement policy and practices. To effectively engage help seekers, Johnson et al. recommended a deeper understanding of their core needs and experiences, which can be achieved by conducting targeted research into their views, values, and concerns. Finding can then be used to develop engagement approaches that relate to their needs.
Participants also noted that some parents do not know how to get engaged and may be disconnected due to limited time because of work and family responsibilities as well as “sociobackground disconnect.” These findings can be interpreted in the context of
the literature as Johnson et al. (2013) discussed the need for greater understanding of the